The table below has eight different answers that are used to address the question of the effective rate of corporate income tax in Ireland. Some of the details behind each approach are in this DoF Technical Paper (done jointly with Kate Levey) with #3 and #5 judged best for gauging the effective tax rate on the aggregate total of corporate profits in Ireland.
But, of course, the choice is yours.
On a related matter the Tax Strategy Group papers for Budget 2014 were released last week including one, albeit somewhat redacted, on Corporation Tax Policy.
Central Bank conference details here.
I am a few days late on this but the government White paper on Universal Health Insurance is an important document and worth a thread here. The Irish Times have a summary here.
Some links that might be helpful
The White Paper itself:
Here is a basic article from the Irish Times giving the details of the white paper:
Column by Muiris Houston arguing that it will never be implemented:
Piece by Billy Kelleher on the cost of universal health insurance:
Irish Independent article on opposition to the proposal:
Paul Cullen in the Irish Times: Dutch health insurance costing 23.5% of income
Universal Healthcare: Trick or Treat? (www.irishhealth.com) by Catherine Wilkinson and Declan Brennan:
Article from http://www.thejournal.ie where GPs argue that they were not adequately consulted:
Fianna Fáil opposition:
Article from http://www.thejournal.ie on opposition from health workers:
Briggs, A. (2013). How changes to Irish healthcare financing are affecting universal health coverage. Health Policy, Volume 113, Issue 1 , Pages 45-49.
McKee et al (2013). Universal Health Coverage: A Quest for All Countries But under Threat in Some.Value in Health (Elsevier Science). Supplement, Vol. 16 Issue s1, pS39-S45.
The Irish Central Bank is forecasting strong growth in Ireland of about 2% in GDP in the latest quarterly bulletin (.pdf). Pages 20 and 21 should interest readers of this blog. Thomas Conefrey and Suzanne Linehan dig into the employment growth numbers in a useful box-out. As usual the report is a chart fest, which is great for the wonky folk who frequent this site, but this one caught my eye. In the figure below you’re looking at household debt relative to disposable income, but also relative to total assets in the household sector.
What is remarkable is the scale of the problem relative to other developed countries. Irish debt to disposable income is about 196%, UK debt to disposable income is about 140%, US is about 120%. Here’s a really useful paper (.pdf) by Clare Lebartz looking at the distribution of household debt by income distribution which goes into the mechanics of this buildup a bit more.
The other sharp change is the brown line, driven by an increase in household assets mainly.
In a speech largely saying nothing, Mario Draghi today described how domestic demand, and absence of reforms are risks to growth. Reforms, of course, could mean anything at all, and they are the Eurocrat catch-all for ‘we don’t know’, but domestic demand is something we can measure, and it’s something the ESRI have worked a lot on recently (.pdf). Your average undergraduate knows about the relationship between employment and domestic demand, and should also be aware that credit conditions matter for the growth of the real economy.
If we look at the Irish economy, in levels indexed to Q1, 2007, the chart below shows total domestic demand and employment on the left hand axis, which I start at 60 to pull out the difference between them a bit, and, measured on the right hand axis, the bar chart shows the flow of credit advanced when you exclude financial intermediation and property.
On the last reading domestic demand is about 21% down from Q1, 2007, while employment is about 15% down from the peak in early 2008. The annual change in the employment series from Q42012 to Q42013 is about 3%, while the annual change in demand is almost 0%.
Credit advanced meanwhile is, unsurprisingly, negative, relative to Q1 2007, from Q3 2010 onwards.
April the first seems like as good a day as any to open a thread on the recent TCD rebranding initiative, which according to Brian Lucey cost the cash-strapped university around €100,000. A few questions arise:
Has it occurred to TCD that it actually has a very strong brand (how I hate that word), and that this may in fact be the reason that it does reasonably well in reputation-based surveys?
Isn’t the new shield just a little bit chintzy, and was the old one not much nicer?
If they are going to make a big deal about the book in the new crest not necessarily being the Bible of the old one, is there not a problem with the name of the College itself (my kids pointed that one out before collapsing in a fit of giggles)?
Isn’t the whole idea of “rebranding” a university just a little bit second division, and does this exercise not risk damaging the reputation of the institution?
Is there any chance that having spent €100,000 on the exercise, the promised staff consultations will be any more than a box-ticking exercise?
In a recent post, we read that
With the Social Democrats (S&D) and the conservatives (EPP) neck-and-neck in ever more refined EU wide opinion pools, the lead up to the European elections has never been more exciting. It’s down to one seat whether the next Commission president is Social Democrat or Conservative.
I am sure that there are some in Brussels who think that giving voters an indirect say in who becomes Commission President is exactly what we need to boost interest in the forthcoming European elections, and give the European project some democratic legitimacy.
By the way, does anyone know what the EPP or Social Democratic position on the Eurozone crisis is? (I think I know what Marine Le Pen wants.)
I have another proposal to enhance the democratic legitimacy of the project: allow voters to fundamentally change the direction of policy, should they so choose. Reverse the “treaty-isation” of particular economic policies. Stop trying to make the commitment to austerity democracy-proof.